"Carlos Solís" dijo [Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:24:15AM -0600]:
> Several authors in the free software movement (most particularly the
> members of the FSF) are reluctant to use DFCW licensing (CC-BY-SA, or
> CC-BY) because, in that way, their works of opinion could be freely
> modified by others, which could be used to distort their opinions [1].
> However, despite of the obvious reason for their decision, such a position
> has been perceived as incongruent by free culture advocates [2]. A way to
> be able to freely license a work, while guaranteeing that the integrity of
> the authors of opinion works and their ideas is upheld, should be of great
> concern for the following versions of CC-BY-SA licenses.
>> My idea to do it would be to add a mandatory disclaimer for derivative
> CC-BY-SA works of opinion that states whether the derivative work has been
> stated by the original author to be in the spirit of the original work or
> not. In the negative case, the derivative work must clearly state that the
> derivative work's ideas are solely from the author of the derivative work,
> not necessarily from the original author.
Humm... Would you be willing to allow an equivalent provision to be
added to the GPL? I mean, if I take your source code and remove all
the free() calls (creating bloated software that never hands back its
memory) or adding to it bits that convert it into spyware, I'm clearly
doing a disservice to the program's users. However, I am free to do
it, just stating that I'm a coauthor for it (and pointing to the
original sources if I'm a really good citizen). But I am in no way
under an obligation to clearly state it was not your intention for me
to turn your program into spyware.